From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6253: Please resize mini-buffer for queries even if Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 10:10:48 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1274624840 10542 80.91.229.12 (23 May 2010 14:27:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 14:27:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 6253@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 23 16:27:18 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGC98-0004Ji-1v for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 May 2010 16:27:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38391 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OGC97-0006vU-9o for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:27:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41199 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OGC91-0006ul-N3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:27:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGC90-0008EG-98 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:27:11 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:49901) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGC90-0008EC-6x for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:27:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGBuM-0007hZ-Ff; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:12:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 14:12:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6253 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6253-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6253.127462387129591 (code B ref 6253); Sun, 23 May 2010 14:12:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6253) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 May 2010 14:11:11 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGBtW-0007hE-HU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:11:10 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183] helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGBtV-0007h9-30 for 6253@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:11:09 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEABvU+EtFpZMM/2dsb2JhbACeD3K8AYUTBIw/ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,285,1272859200"; d="scan'208";a="64873857" Original-Received: from 69-165-147-12.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.147.12]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 23 May 2010 10:11:03 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 273D18266; Sun, 23 May 2010 10:10:48 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Lennart Borgman's message of "Sun, 23 May 2010 15:49:52 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 10:12:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:37207 Archived-At: > Why not distinguish between those cases? Maybe a new value for > resize-mini-windows. Ah, you mean a setting that allows resizing minibuffers but not the echo area. Yes, that seems reasonable (tho it may bump into some surprising cases where the user may think he's interacting with a minibuffer whereas she's really looking at the echo area). I'd first want to see a patch for it, Stefan